bhudmaash
06-28-03, 11:12 AM
Ok...I'm kind of typing this as the thought process is happening.
Now , often stupid remarks (well not stupid per se but those that have come out with the owner of the mouth not having spent too much time thinking things through), often such remarks make one think anyway, since those with a modicum of intelligence have to put the moron straight.
Remark in question went something like:
"...well all you muslims have your place, why can't the Israelis have their place?"
After explaining that irespective of Mecca being the location of the holiest site for Muslims, Saudi would still have a Muslm population, if the kaba was in say russia, Saudi would still be all Muslim. Secondly Using Saudi as an comparitive example to the Israel'pally conflict is nonsensical, since the indiginous population os Saudi have been subject of conversion(to Islam) over history. Now the only way one could use saudi as a comparitive, is thus:
If saudi population was non Muslim, and the Kaba still existed in Mecca as the holiest Muslim site, and lets say the Muslims of Pakistan, or Indonesia (or any other place) said we have a relegious right to Mecca, so we want saudi land, so the Non Muslims living indigiously in Saudi.
Ultimately all this boils done to a few simple facts bourne out of history. Firtly, there exist today entire countries or states which are either Muslim or Christian, due to a simple majority of numbers, and this is down to the fact that both christianity and Islam both had the historical mechanism for the propegation and proliferation of their respective cultures ie: EMPIRES.
The christians had the Romans, the Muslims had the Persian, and Ottoman (jihad please feel free to expand and add others) empires. Hence we have the large numbers of the two main faiths.
Now the Jews are in a different position, mainly due to the fact that when they were chased out by the Babylonians they dispersed and over history many converted to C/I hence erradication of the true Israelites.
Now this brings me onto the main point that I kind of want to get out, and I am going to use the Pakistani Muslims as a comparitive here.
The Indians who were Muslim wanted their own Muslim state, fair enough. The state would depend on their ethnicity, ie indian/asian whatever you care to name it. hence the state would be in the same geographical area since it was down to demographics: the Muslims of THAT area wanted their own state, hence Pakistan.
If we are to use the Pakistan case and aply it to the current Isr/pally conflict, it would be like the Pakistanis saying well "well we're muslims, we have a connection with the Quresh hence we want saudi land"
I think this example illustrates the inherent weakness of the Israeli (or more correctly zionist) premise.
The Zioinists who want Israel claim link with Hebrew Israelites: WRONG they are Ashkenazim, of euro/slav stock whose euro ancestors converted to Judasim.
So the Ashkenazim CANNOT claim Hebrew heritage THE SAME WAY THAT Pakistanis CANNOT claim to be decendants of the original Quresh..off course not, their ancestors al converted from Sikhs/Hindus.
So that brings me to Pakistan. The Pak Muslims got their Muslim state based on their ethnicity..fine.
Thus the Ashkenazim ON THE SAME BASIS ARE ENTITLED TO THEIR JEWISH STATE , but should also be based on their ethnicity, hence should be somewhere in Europe.
Now , often stupid remarks (well not stupid per se but those that have come out with the owner of the mouth not having spent too much time thinking things through), often such remarks make one think anyway, since those with a modicum of intelligence have to put the moron straight.
Remark in question went something like:
"...well all you muslims have your place, why can't the Israelis have their place?"
After explaining that irespective of Mecca being the location of the holiest site for Muslims, Saudi would still have a Muslm population, if the kaba was in say russia, Saudi would still be all Muslim. Secondly Using Saudi as an comparitive example to the Israel'pally conflict is nonsensical, since the indiginous population os Saudi have been subject of conversion(to Islam) over history. Now the only way one could use saudi as a comparitive, is thus:
If saudi population was non Muslim, and the Kaba still existed in Mecca as the holiest Muslim site, and lets say the Muslims of Pakistan, or Indonesia (or any other place) said we have a relegious right to Mecca, so we want saudi land, so the Non Muslims living indigiously in Saudi.
Ultimately all this boils done to a few simple facts bourne out of history. Firtly, there exist today entire countries or states which are either Muslim or Christian, due to a simple majority of numbers, and this is down to the fact that both christianity and Islam both had the historical mechanism for the propegation and proliferation of their respective cultures ie: EMPIRES.
The christians had the Romans, the Muslims had the Persian, and Ottoman (jihad please feel free to expand and add others) empires. Hence we have the large numbers of the two main faiths.
Now the Jews are in a different position, mainly due to the fact that when they were chased out by the Babylonians they dispersed and over history many converted to C/I hence erradication of the true Israelites.
Now this brings me onto the main point that I kind of want to get out, and I am going to use the Pakistani Muslims as a comparitive here.
The Indians who were Muslim wanted their own Muslim state, fair enough. The state would depend on their ethnicity, ie indian/asian whatever you care to name it. hence the state would be in the same geographical area since it was down to demographics: the Muslims of THAT area wanted their own state, hence Pakistan.
If we are to use the Pakistan case and aply it to the current Isr/pally conflict, it would be like the Pakistanis saying well "well we're muslims, we have a connection with the Quresh hence we want saudi land"
I think this example illustrates the inherent weakness of the Israeli (or more correctly zionist) premise.
The Zioinists who want Israel claim link with Hebrew Israelites: WRONG they are Ashkenazim, of euro/slav stock whose euro ancestors converted to Judasim.
So the Ashkenazim CANNOT claim Hebrew heritage THE SAME WAY THAT Pakistanis CANNOT claim to be decendants of the original Quresh..off course not, their ancestors al converted from Sikhs/Hindus.
So that brings me to Pakistan. The Pak Muslims got their Muslim state based on their ethnicity..fine.
Thus the Ashkenazim ON THE SAME BASIS ARE ENTITLED TO THEIR JEWISH STATE , but should also be based on their ethnicity, hence should be somewhere in Europe.